| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
History takes a Big Mac-sized byte out of Microsoft | |
|
||
| Time: 16:09 EST/21:09 GMT | News Source: The Globe & Mail | Posted By: Todd Richardson | ||
|
An unwritten historical law says that an empire is at its most vulnerable at the apex of its greatest power and influence. People don't live long enough to see the parabola of political empires but the life cycle of businesses is comparable. Take les Big Macs for instance — McDonald's and Microsoft. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 209 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:03:09 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 3/2/2003 12:44:40 AM |
|
Steven123 - "That isn't a truly accurate statement, their apex will have been reached once their market share shrinks, even if only by one or two percent"
So, I guess Apple hit their apex a few years ago, using your indicator. No, one only has to look at Microsoft's strong product pipeline to know that the apex is still quite a ways off. Its not as if Windows is their one and only product. This post was edited by mooresa56 on Sunday, March 02, 2003 at 00:45. |
| #2 By 1845 (12.209.152.69) at 3/2/2003 9:37:36 AM |
|
Here's a question - if a company falls, reinvents itself, and returns to glory greater than it was before, when did it reach its apex? Dell flip flopped several times being or not being the #1 PC sales company. Did they have multiple apexes (sp?) or is this apex line of thinking just rather foolish?
It is conceivable that Windows will loose market share, which will temporarily hurt Microsoft, and that following that Microsoft will return with more emphasis on services making more money than they do now. In terms of stock price, one could say Microsoft (along with Cisco, Oracle, IBM, Sun, etc.) apexed back in '99. It would have seemed the IBM also was at its greatest in the 70's and that after their decade plus anti trust fight, the bungling of the personal computer with surrender to Intel and Microsoft, etc. that IBM's glory was only to diminish. It is entirely possible that IBM will regain the what it lost and more. Only when a company has become extinct can we correctly state when its strongest and weakest times were. |
| #3 By 3339 (65.198.47.50) at 3/2/2003 4:22:07 PM |
|
Come on, Bob--we can speak relatively... Yes, you can have new life... but, yes, most would agree that IBM's apex was in the seventies, they had a decline, they have returned. If MS slips, it is not as if they will slip into irrelevency--they will still be one of the biggest players, just not as powerful as they once had been... Isn't that still true of IBM today? Once again powerful and potent, but not the mover they once were? I don't think IBM has to be wiped off the face of the planet to know that it was the Emperor of tech in the seventies, and despite regaining its footing isn't yet again and most likely never will be.
Parker's point is just weird--MS is only at its apex after it has lost 45% of its marketshare? Umm, I think most people in the anti-MS camp would be satisfied with that as a nadir, not an apex. Mooresa, clearly irrelevent--Apple was at its peak when it had 20+% of the PC market back in the 80s... But the point is really to focus on the true, true empires: MS, MacD, ATT, IBM--Apple was never an Empire so how relevent is it to speak of its apex as an empire? If you have 20% and lose 1,2, 10, or 15%--you are not an Empire on the decline; however, if you have 95% and lose 1,2, or 5%, that's an early indication that the strength of the empire simply to maintain its own momentum has waned. |
| #4 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 3/2/2003 7:40:43 PM |
|
Axxiom, I don't think that would be too far off. Especially if we further decide to act without the UN... Isn't that funny--Georgie is saying "Old Europe" is making the UN irrelevent, but aren't they just expressing what's best for them and the point of the UN is to act on the consensus? Wouldn't Georgie not heeding the mandate of the UN, because he has enough power to disregard it and his own agenda, be making the UN irrelevent since it really doesn't matter what the UN determines in his mind?
Anyway, yes, I'm not really worried about terror attacks NOW--what scares the sh!t out of me is what terrorist attack may come in 3 to 5 years time after we have attacked and occupied Iraq.... Does anyone think that we are "defeating" terrorism? I'd call it breeding terrorism. Throw in the fact that we now want to be able to preemptively nuke any "evil" nation (is Iraq really more evil than Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea?)... and that we are helping expand nuclear power/development in Turkey, Iran, and many other parts of the world... Yes, the US may have seen better days. This post was edited by sodajerk on Sunday, March 02, 2003 at 19:43. |
| #5 By 135 (208.50.206.187) at 3/2/2003 7:46:12 PM |
|
Axxiom - "I mean you guys are obviously at your apex, never have you been more powerful or influential yet more and more people and countries are slipping through your fingers."
Nope, that's just the apex of neo-conservatism you're seeing. |
| #6 By 3339 (67.119.195.177) at 3/2/2003 9:21:28 PM |
|
Oh yeah, thanks, soda, I meant to add that since we do live in a democracy, this can all change... unfortunately, there is usually quite a bit of momentum behind policy changes.
Get a Democrat or a sane Republican in office in a year or five, and things could be much better... not that everyone isn't already going to hate us, but.... |
| #7 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 3/3/2003 12:55:22 PM |
|
baarod, that's idiotic... Libertarians like to pretend they have a platform, that it is cohesive and logical, but it's a great big pile of self-serving crap.
But I wasn't trying to endorse any political affiliation... My point was: it's difficult to topple any Empire if the "empire" has a self-regulating mechanism by which every 4 or 8 years, we clean house. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 209 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:03:09 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
